Steve Pomerance

The latest Colorado energy bill,  HB19-1313 , was apparently drafted for (and presumably by) Xcel Energy, though its language allows other utilities to choose to come under its provisions. Here is the bill’s fundamental requirement: “By 2030, the qualifying retail utility shall reduce the carbon dioxide emissions associated with electricity sales to the qualifying retail utility’s retail electricity customers by eighty percent from 2005 levels. For the years 2050 and thereafter, or sooner if practicable, the qualifying retail utility shall seek to achieve the goal of providing its retail customers with energy generated from one-hundred-percent clean energy resources so long as doing so is technically and economically feasible, in the public interest …” The bill only covers “retail sales” and does not include “sales for resale.” These constitute about a fifth of Xcel’s total sales. It only regulates CO2, but not other emissions, like methane. So the bill allows much more green...

I just reviewed the 2019 Legislature’s bills related to our critical need to reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses. I’m very pleased that finally we are really moving forward, thanks in large part to our elected representatives from the Boulder area. But the process is not complete, and some legislation is missing important pieces. Here are some brief comments on some of the bills: HB19-1261 — Climate Action Plan To Reduce Pollution This far-reaching bill requires an overall statewide reduction in 2025 greenhouse gas emissions by at least 26 percent from 2005 levels, 2030 greenhouse gas emissions by at least 50 percent, and 2050 greenhouse gas emissions by at least 90 percent. Additionally, it requires regulated investor-owned utilities (IOUs) to create “clean energy plans” to meet an 80 percent reduction target for their emissions by 2030, though the language is somewhat confusing re: actual performance. In exchange, these utilities apparently get relief from future carbon taxes...

Last week I testified at a Colorado legislative committee hearing regarding HB19-1037, the “securitization” bill. This arcane but important concept emerged as many states shifted from supplying electricity through regulated monopolies to competitive systems, where customers and communities have choices as to where they get their power. As a result, these monopolies lost their captive markets, so their uncompetitive power plants built under the old regulated system no longer had customers. But the utilities had relied on the regulatory structure to provide a guaranteed revenue stream, so the states had to cover the utilities’ losses to avoid “regulatory takings,” where utilities are involuntarily deprived of something they relied upon. Securitization was a way to reduce the cost of solving this problem: Bonds were sold that had backing from a governmental entity. The proceeds paid off the utilities for their remaining investment in these plants; the bonds were then paid off by the r...

This year Boulder will be updating its Transportation Master Plan, so now is the time to focus on what needs to be done. The key fact is that we are past the inflection point on the hockey stick-shaped graph of congestion versus traffic. In other words, we’ve used up the capacity of our roads, so a little more traffic produces a whole lot more congestion. Just look at the huge numbers of cars stacked up for long stretches on Colo. 93, U.S. 36, Arapahoe Road, the Diagonal Highway, etc., in the morning or evening, and the jams during lunch hour in many places around town. Also, many local interior roads that had no real congestion some years ago now have delays through multiple signal cycles at many times during the day. Having just reviewed the current 2014 TMP, and having been involved in the original plan and its updates, as well as having studied some innovative strategies in other places, here are some suggestions for the city council and staff: First, set standards that you...

Introduction: There seem to be three major potentials for vote mis-counts or fraud: votes being improperly recorded or tallied, vote buying or voter coercion, and ballot box stuffing or ballot shredding. Unless every voter watch every other voter and every public official at every step, it’s impossible to be truly certain that some form of mis-count or fraud did not occur, no matter what the system. Right now, voters have two primary concerns: Were my votes accurately recorded? Were everyone’s votes totaled up accurately? Current “trust me” systems, whether paper or machine based, do not allow ordinary citizens to allay these concerns. But both these concerns can be simply addressed by allowing voters to independently check the County Clerk’s records of the votes in a way that still preserves the anonymity of the voting process. Summary of Proposal: Every individual citizen’s votes would be anonymously recorded as a single record...

This concept, popularized by Garret Hardin in the 1960s, discusses a community owned pasture that is becoming overgrazed because, although each additional cow on the land benefited that cow’s owner, the end result was damage to everyone. In other words, the cumulative effect of decisions that may benefit given individuals may irreversibly harm the whole community. This problem manifests itself in as many ways as we have “commons.” At the most global level, our common atmosphere has provided us with the stable climate that allowed humans to flourish. Yet our extra cows — our individual greenhouse gas emissions — are in the process of destabilizing our climate, threatening to extinguish much of life on Earth. Locally, we have many commons: wonderful open space, great mountain views, mostly non-gridlocked street system, lots of parks and recreation centers, good schools, multiple bikeways, some permanently affordable housing, accessible libraries, peaceful and uncongested neighbor...

I commend the Boulder City Council for having an ambitious list of projects to consider for its January 2019 retreat. But the first thing I’d like to see the council do is to correct some of what went awry in 2018. Their goal here should be to re-establish trust between the citizens, city staff, and council members so we all can work together to make Boulder a better place to live. First on the list is the “opportunity zone” mess. It is simply unacceptable that the city staff did not immediately communicate with the Council and the public about the opportunity zone process when the state informed them about it in mid-February 2018. It wouldn’t have taken more than a few minutes to forward the state’s emailed request to the council Hotline. Then the Council members and interested citizens could have known about it. But instead, the city manager submitted the application without anyone knowing except some city Economic Vitality staff members and Chamber of Commerce folks. The city ...

According to the IRS, “Opportunity Zones are an economic development tool — that is, they are designed to spur economic development and job creation in distressed communities.” This concept was part of the 2017 Republican tax cut bill. About 8,700 census tracts have been approved as opportunity zones across the country. Boulder’s opportunity zone was selected by the governor’s Office of Economic Development and our city government employees without consulting the City Council or the citizens. This census tract is about 2.5 square miles, and encompasses the area between 28th and 55th Streets, and from Arapahoe Road to Iris Avenue, with a notch cut out by Valmont and Airport roads. This “distressed community” includes the new Google office buildings, the 29th Street Mall and Boulder Junction. Obviously, this choice was not about helping the disadvantaged; it was about getting investors to dump yet more money into Boulder, plain and simple.(Diagonal Plaza is the only part of the oppor...

According to the IRS, “An Opportunity Zone is an economically-distressed community where new investments, under certain conditions, may be eligible for preferential tax treatment.” “Opportunity Zones are an economic development tool—that is, they are designed to spur economic development and job creation in distressed communities.” So you know, according to our state government, which designated Colorado’s Opportunity Zones, the area in Boulder between 28 th Street and 55 th , from Arapahoe to Iris, is a “distressed community.” And we’re not the only one to have such a bizarre designation. Parts of Fort Collins, Estes Park, and Grand Junction are now OZs. But there are some rural parts of the state included that at least might be genuinely in need. Investing in an OZ gets you some incredibly beneficial tax breaks. If you stay in the deal for 10 years, you pay no Federal capital gains tax on any profit you make in the deal. (Plus, you get to avoid 15% of the capital gains tax...

Last Friday morning, I was asked by some folks to take a look at the details of Proposition 110, the 20-year 0.62 percent state sales tax increase that would fund transportation projects. In the portions of the proposed law that would give counties and cities 40 percent of the revenues (with half going to each) I noticed the following phrase, “(1) After paying the costs of the Colorado state patrol and any other costs of the department (CDOT) exclusive of highway construction, highway improvements, or highway maintenance, that are appropriated by the general assembly …,” followed by the allocation rules for the counties and cities. So it’s clear, this phrase is embedded in the current statutes, and the drafters of Proposition 110 simply included it and made it apply to Proposition 110’s revenues. Then I looked at the portion of Proposition 110 that allocated 45 percent of the proceeds to the state. I was surprised to find that this phrase was specifically removed. And it was not ...